|
Page 1 of 1
|
Author |
Message |
KenN0898
Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 139
Location: Adelaide Australia
|
Ghurkha awarded with the CGC for action in Afghanistan
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1393355/Hero-Gurkha-handed-bravery-medal-Queen-said-I-thought-I-going-die--I-tried-kill-I-could.html
Reading the Daily Mail story, I would sugest Corporal Dipprasad Pun has been sold short when his award of the CGC is compared to some other bravery awards that have been made in the fairly recent past.
_________________ KenN
|
Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:41 pm |
|
|
Rectalgia
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Posts: 1512
Location: Perth, Western Australia
|
You're right Ken. Even other recent CGC recipients think he should have been up for the VC (one such stated it plainly in a forum on another site). "For Valour" the VC inscription says, and it is hard to imagine an individual performance where more of that might be shown. There must be other considerations in play - it always was and always will be a bit of a lottery because of those.
From the amount of public commentary and awareness and support for Cpl Pun I wouldn't be surprised if the awards committee (or whatever/whoever is responsible to investigate and recommend) ends up being required to explain. They should have anticipated that, I'm sure they would have and that they will be prepared if it comes to that. Who knows, even they might welcome some transparency - but on prior performance I wouldn't think so.
Steve
_________________ Former 'nasho', RAE Borneo (Confrontation)
|
Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:56 pm |
|
|
KenN0898
Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 139
Location: Adelaide Australia
|
Yes Steve, I am sure there will be questions as to why Cpl Pun wasn't awarded the VC and rightly so, and I am equally sure that those responsible will have the answers for any questions thrown at them.
However, I have read the citations for the five most recent Victoria Cross awards and while I have no wish to take anything away from those recipients for their actions in Iraq and Afghanistan It appears to me that the action where Cpl Pun won his Conspicuous Gallantry Cross was more worthy of a bravery award than most, if not all of those previous actions where the Victoria Cross was awarded.
And I would like to add that imho, it is a shame that a medal such as the Victoria Cross, a medal recognised throughout the world as the very pinnacle of British imperial bravery awards, can now be awarded by at least 3 countries totally independently of Great Britain and the British medals system.
Last edited by KenN0898 on Sat Jun 04, 2011 2:54 pm; edited 1 time in total
_________________ KenN
|
Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:48 pm |
|
|
Rectalgia
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Posts: 1512
Location: Perth, Western Australia
|
No question at all about Cpl Pun's action - staggering bravery. For some awards there are/seem to be considerations of strategic or morale value as well as the actual actions and of course there's always the matter of witnesses and the status of those making the recommendation and political needs. Utterly wrong of course but that seems to be the way of it.
VCs for Australia, NZ & Canada. Haven't checked the letters patent but am reasonably sure the Oz one at least is approved by the Queen (rather than GG as for all other Oz "gallantries"). Suspect it would be the same for NZ, quite unsure about Canada. Anyway, that much at least represents some element of continuity (though "Queen of Australia," etc. rather than Queen of the United Kingdom and of Northern Ireland). I suppose we other constitutional monarchies found it incongruous and inconvenient to be be going to the UK for the award - same way as the ties with the Privy Council as the top judicial authority were devolved to national courts and the several constitutional documents were returned to the respective countries (poor old Canadians had a bit of a battle to get theirs back ).
But, your point, it leaves open the question of relative merit, nobody could dispute. The 'criteria' for the award of the VC have always been contentious and subject to myth and others, more knowledgeable than I, have reckoned they were variable over time even when there was just the one "issuing authority". That is why Cpl Pun's award - if it is contested that the VC is justified - might throw some useful light on things.
It often was contentious. Looking the other way, at a reversed downgrade, TL (Jack) Axford's 4 July 1918 recommendation for a VC was changed to DCM, either by his division or (more likely) GOC Australian forces, but then reversed (back to VC) with no public documentation of the reversal authority (that I can see). Brig-Gen Brand, signing off on the recommendation, was only acting Divisional Commander, that might have had something to do with it. Lt-Col Drake-Brockman, acting Brigade commander and who raised the recommendation, didn't actually recommend a specific award though it is plain he meant the VC. He was a distant cousin of Jack's - that might have contributed to some vacillation though I doubt either party (far less the AIF) knew of the relationship. There was another VC awarded in the same action, maybe that had something to do with it. More likely it was just the matter of finding witnesses to verify the bleedin' obvious. The process was a bit mysterious in certain cases ... and of course continues to be so.
_________________ Former 'nasho', RAE Borneo (Confrontation)
|
Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:12 am |
|
|
KenN0898
Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 139
Location: Adelaide Australia
|
There appears to be a number of people on various forums asking why the VC wasn't awarded,....one answer was the fact that there were no witnesses,...so I gess it was a case of the dead not being able to talk to verify the action. The more I think about it the more I think there were some politics involved somewhere.
_________________ KenN
|
Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:57 am |
|
|
John Feltham
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 764
Location: Townsville, North Queensland
|
KenN0898 wrote:There appears to be a number of people on various forums asking why the VC wasn't awarded,....one answer was the fact that there were no witnesses,....
Another is that the witness must be an Officer - or it used to be. One never knows these days whether the rules have been changed by the mob called the HD Committee.
They've done it before.
_________________ Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.
|
Sat Jun 04, 2011 2:04 pm |
|
|
whalley
Joined: 17 Jun 2009
Posts: 98
|
John Feltham wrote:KenN0898 wrote:There appears to be a number of people on various forums asking why the VC wasn't awarded,....one answer was the fact that there were no witnesses,....
Another is that the witness must be an Officer - or it used to be. One never knows these days whether the rules have been changed by the mob called the HD Committee.
They've done it before.
and they will do it again when it suits their purpose but only if it benefits them
|
Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:43 am |
|
|
|
The time now is Mon Dec 02, 2024 7:58 pm | All times are GMT
|
Page 1 of 1
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|